In In re Navarro, No. 19-12612 (July 30, 2019) (Ed
Carnes, Rosenbaum, Black) (per curiam), the Court denied a successive application
based on Davis.
Although the applicant ultimately pled guilty only to Hobbs
Act conspiracy and 924(c), the plea agreement and factual proffer established
that his 924(c) offense was predicated on both Hobbs Act conspiracy and two
charged drug trafficking offenses in connection with a stash house robbery. And the facts for all three predicate
offenses were inextricaly intertwined.
Therefore, the Court reasoned, even ifthe Hobbs Act conspiracy no longer qualified as a
crime of violence, his drug offenses fully supported the 924(c) conviction. The Court noted that this case was
distinguishable from In re Gomez because that case involved a jury
trial, which returned a general verdict; here, however, there was no
uncertainty as to which of the predicate offenses identified in the indictment
underlied the 924(c) conviction.
The Court also denied authorization as to a claim about the
Sentencing Guidelines.
Judge Rosenbaum concurred because, on this record, it was
clear that the 924(c) offense was based in part on drug offenses. However, she would have ended the analysis
there.
